Permanent Starbase Tech Revisited

RenegadePeon · Post by **RenegadePeon** » Tue May 15, 2007 5:58 pm

I do not understand why starbase tech is permanent. A team shouldn't be able to prolong their doom by having only one sector left and a basic supremacy base by defending this one sector with 8 to 10 gunships because that's the only tech they have. If you lost your starbase and you do not have tech from your other tech base, it should be easy pickings at that point. I think this is an issue that really kind of makes Allegiance really frusterating. Because instead of being able to start the next game, we have to play a won game an extra 20 minutes because the other team is stubborn.

Not saying I can't get over it, but I think changing this would make DN even better.

MadAccountant · Post by **MadAccountant** » Tue May 15, 2007 6:51 pm

You talking about garrison or starbase? If garrison should you lose bombers? Are you going to make a team scrounge up the money to buy a garrison so they even stand a chance or reduce its cost? If you're so worried about keeping starbase tech perhaps the team should just die after they lose the garrison?

I think you're real complaint is about gunships. So why not pick those apart instead of trying to change the whole dynamic about what happens with garrison tech?

RenegadePeon · Post by **RenegadePeon** » Tue May 15, 2007 8:41 pm

Did I not specifically say starbase?

If you lose your STARBASE (one more time, say it with me: STARBASE) you should lose all tech associated with that STARBASE. So, heavy bombers, heavy scouts, gunships, etc. All STARBASE related tech should go. You would keep your bombers, scouts (advanced), etc.

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Wed May 16, 2007 5:07 am

Maybe just nerf GS or lose GS when the starbase goes, because this seems to me like a GS problem.

I would hate to lose everything like TP1 and the rest of it, but it would nerf BIOS majorly.

Shizoku · Post by **Shizoku** » Wed May 16, 2007 6:59 am

Hvy scout should remain due to it being tied to a tech base, but the GS should die if you kill the Starbase imo.

MadAccountant · Post by **MadAccountant** » Wed May 16, 2007 12:29 pm

Hey Mr Sarcastic, I asked a question. No reason to get snarky about it. Especially since YOU weren't specific about what to remove other than gunships in your original post.

peon, your proposal is inconsistent. Currently if you lose tech bases you lose all that tech unless you're belters. Now you're saying if you lose the starbase you can keep garrison tech but not starbase tech. So if they have bombers they can keep that but not heavy bombers and not med3 shields. If they're sup they can keep they're small shield 2 but not small shield 3. And if you're against tac you can keep your cm2 but not cm3. So basically if your team happened to bomb the garrison instead of the tech base you want an easy road to victory instead of letting the other team have a chance to come back.

I still say your beef is with gunships and you're just trying to find another way to attack them instead of dealing with the issue.

Malicious Wraith · Post by **Malicious Wraith** » Wed May 16, 2007 2:14 pm

Nothing wrong with gunships here, move along.

But, seriously... with the exception of bios you should be forced to get a techbase before you get gunships just like heavy scouts.

Then if you lose tech base, you lose gunships. Easy enough in my opinion.

RenegadePeon · Post by **RenegadePeon** » Wed May 16, 2007 2:47 pm

MadAccountant wrote:QUOTE (MadAccountant @ May 16 2007, 07:29 AM) Hey Mr Sarcastic, I asked a question. No reason to get snarky about it. Especially since YOU weren't specific about what to remove other than gunships in your original post.

peon, your proposal is inconsistent. Currently if you lose tech bases you lose all that tech unless you're belters. Now you're saying if you lose the starbase you can keep garrison tech but not starbase tech. So if they have bombers they can keep that but not heavy bombers and not med3 shields. If they're sup they can keep they're small shield 2 but not small shield 3. And if you're against tac you can keep your cm2 but not cm3. So basically if your team happened to bomb the garrison instead of the tech base you want an easy road to victory instead of letting the other team have a chance to come back.

I still say your beef is with gunships and you're just trying to find another way to attack them instead of dealing with the issue.

My beef isn't *just* with gunships. My beef is that there is little damage done by killing one of your opponent's toughest bases as far as bringing you closer to winning the game. Because the reality is, if my team goes Sup (with an unupgraded garrison), and their team goes Starbase (with an unupgraded tech base), they automatically have an advantage:

If they kill our main tech, we lose all our advanced game winning stuff. If we kill their main tech, they don't lose anything, except the ability to make more tech bases. And in most games I have played, having your advanced tech was more important than making more tech bases as expanding wasn't really an option anyway. Being able to continue to TP drop with heavy bombers nanned by heavy scouts is just silly when technically, you should have delivered a fatal blow to your opponent just as what would have been done to you had you lost your main tech base. They should not be able to continue to keep their game winning tech without actually having the tech base (TP with heavy bombers and heavy scouts). I personally feel that that's silly and not consistent with how other tech bases work.

I would honestly be for losing bombers as well (unless you were belters) when you lose your garrison (keep scouts since every faction begins the game with them). But I understand for balance reasons why this would be bad. But as far as the advanced tech goes in the starbase, that should definitely be disabled without having the base.

MadAccountant · Post by **MadAccountant** » Wed May 16, 2007 8:05 pm

meh, I don't have a problem with how it is. I look at the spending that was done and expect to deal with some hardship. Starbase tech is still in between basic tech and adv tech from exp/tac/sup. If you concentrate on adv tech you shouldn't have a problem dealing with starbase. If you do your comm or your team is doing something wrong. Knowing how pickup games go this doesn't surprise me.

Anguirel · Post by **Anguirel** » Tue May 22, 2007 11:15 pm

MadAccountant wrote:QUOTE (MadAccountant @ May 16 2007, 08:29 AM) And if you're against tac you can keep your cm2 but not cm3.

Just a small factual correction: Unless DN has changed this, CM2 and 3 are actually Sup/Exp, not Starbase. Which is why the research will sometimes appear there even when your Garrison/Starbase has been destroyed, and why you can get CM3 without upgrading the Garrison to a Starbase.

You may now resume your regularly scheduled discussion.